Banks falsify credit card lawsuits in 90 percent of cases?

(RT)   US credit card companies have been churning out lawsuits and improperly collecting debt from consumers 90 percent of the time, at least according to a New York judge who deals with these cases.

Lawsuits produced by credit car companies to recoup unpaid bills often rely on inaccurate documents, incomplete records and generic testimonies from witnesses who repeatedly testify, the New York Times reported. The companies often sue clients for more money than is owed.

“I would say that roughly 90 percent of the credit card lawsuits are flawed and can’t prove the person owes the debt,”said Brooklyn civil court judge Noach Dear. The judge told the Times he sees as many as 100 such cases a day.

By “robo-signing” documents, banks “robotically” mass-produce similar papers for different clients, without properly reviewing them. In the process some of the papers get falsified.

Lenders often try to collect money from clients who have already paid their bills. Other times, they increase the lenders’ debt by unfairly adding fees and erroneous interest costs.

Some clients claim they don’t owe anything, but most disagreements come from credit card companies conflicting with clients about how much is rightfully owed.

But in 95 percent of lawsuits, the credit card companies win – even though the lawsuits sometimes include falsified credit card statements produced years after the borrowers fell behind on payments.

A former JPMorgan Chase employee admitted that nearly 23,000 delinquent accounts had incorrect balances.

Taryn Gregory said she was sued by Discover for more than $7,000 in credit card debt, even though she had only accumulated $4,000. Upon examining the lawsuit, the Times found that the documents said they were produced in 2004, even though the advertisements on the bottom of the page were from 2010.

American Express borrower Felicia Tancreto was sued for $16,000. She admitted having fallen behind on payments, but contested owing that much. After attending court, the judge dismissed the lawsuit for lack of evidence.

But in most cases, the borrowers do not attend court, causing the lenders to win 95 percent of the time.

“Our concerns center on the fact that debt collection lawsuits are a pure volume business. The documentation is very bare bones,” said Tom Pahl, assistant director for the Federal Trade Commission’s division of financial practices.

The extent of the “robo-signing” is not known, but the erroneous lawsuits have been a problem for years. In April 2011, JPMorgan Chase & Co. abandoned over 1,000 debt collection lawsuits after their bank documentation was questioned by courts.

But unless lawsuit victims defend themselves in court, suspicious judges suspect the credit card companies will continue to get away with overcharging their clients.

“I do suspect flaws,” said Harry Walsh, a superior court judge in California. “But there is little I can do.”

http://rt.com/usa/news/credit-companies-debt-clients-594/

2 Responses to Banks falsify credit card lawsuits in 90 percent of cases?

  • What’s the saddest of all, most of us can’t even do shit about this ourselves. They got the money and authority while we’re down on the bottom getting our mighty ass rapes non stop. They keep tacking on more and more fees and other bullshit even when you prove to them beyond a shadow of a doubt that you paid on time. It’s maddening. What’s more maddening is when you prove your case to them, and they tack on even MORE fees and whatnot as if there’s such thing as a "Congratulations! You proved us wrong!" fee. These shit bags really are despicable by all measures.

  • The Banks can never prove they could suffer a loss if you didn’t pay them, They never will sign an affidavit based upon first hand knowledge that they loaned you ‘their’ ‘mone;y’, they never in my experience prove a valid contract, show an original wet-ink signed contract, state the account, prove ‘money had, money received’. But…you have to know how to work the court system to win. 99% don’t and fail because of ignorance of the law. The atty sending you a summons claims to represent the Bank, but can’t prove any ‘agency’, power or atty, or contract to act on behalf of the ‘plaintiff’ [the BANK]. I have a case with a friend, we sent all their summons paperwork back to them and to the court, then filed a plea in abatement [affidavit, too] to the BANK giving them 30 days to prove their claim. The atty didn’t know anything about it, of course. Too bad for him. The Bank ignored it as they probable weren’t even aware they were a plaintiff in the case. We sent the Abatement to the Court also and got our copy file stamped. 30 days later we sent a ‘notice of default’ to the Bank and to the Court and got it file stamped. The atty was shocked when he filed for a default and got it sent back by the court as we did file the Abatement rebutting their claim. It sit’s in limbo as the Plaintiff has defaulted on proving their claim and a default is the kiss of death to a case. The atty is buying the debt for %1 and without the knowledge of the BANK making claims he has no knowledge of. The system is completely corrupt, it’s a rare judge that will admit that copies of statements aren’t valid and are hearsay. Only originals count, you have to have an original contract, for god’s sake or what are you making a claim based upon. Ask the BANK if they will cash a photocopy of a check and see what happens.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Show some support!

We are 100% Listener & User supported!! Every little bit helps us continue. Donations help fund the site and keep all the free information on it. Thanks in advance and KEEP UP THE FIGHT!!!

Visitor Map

Subscribe For New Posts & Updates

Enter your email address to subscribe to FederalJack and Popeyeradio and you will receive notifications of new posts by email.

News Categories
The Wigner Effect
Col. L Fletcher Prouty: Secret Team